Astral Dog
Member
This is why Nintendo keeps failing
It's a fun read to look at Reggie the face of Nintendo vs. Reggie the PR guy.
He might be infuriating to some (and looking at some of the other Nintendo threads he absolutely is), but the man has a knack, a gift, for what he is being paid to do.
Reggie could walk into the overwhelming majority of PR/Business Development departments in the world and be successful.
Sometimes I think the nature of the business is lost in here.
First off, why are they asking Reggie about Far Cry 5?
Second, can people stop forcing other people to do whatever the hell they want? Nintendo want to make games about jumping plumbers and collectible monsters without focusing on a social/political message, just for fun, let them fucking do it?
Jesus.
Sad fact is that Reggie is likely GOP (just because a good 90% of people who make to the C-suite are), while Nintendo's leadership is probably big into the Liberal Democratic party of Japan (also right).
Though their games have done some progressive things over the years, they themselves are likely not.
I think that's the case here. The election of Trump was such a shocking, ridiculous and frightening thing that people feel it needs to be opposed whenever it can. People are using that to justify, well, all manner of acts, and they feel that simply being "non-political" is incredibly offensive when being partisan is the only way.
What absolute stupidity.And that is why I will never really care much for Nintendo games. The don't even dare to have any sort of message other than childish fun.
Yep.
In the current climate, anyone that is not with you is against you.
This is why Nintendo keeps failing
But it's all opinion right? What one picks up from it politically/socially, someone else can see something different and someone might not see anything at all, or see it, and just not care or anything in between.
So why emphasize on it? I think when people say they don't want to see politics/social commentary in their games, they mean they don't want it emphasized or focused on, which I say is a good idea as it works for everyone. Those who want to see it/ talk about it can. Those who see it but don't care or don't see it don't have to.
For instance, those who choose to care about political ideas can have the argument is Peach being a princess who gets kidnap sexist, or is it done because she's a matriarch of an entire kingdom and that's the best way to take it over (knock over the king, win the game). Those who choose not to see it or don't care enough about it will choose just to play the game. Ignore the story, characters and lore for just the gameplay because the rest doesn't matter and doesn't have to matter, it was made up for fluff. Who cares what the creator thought when they made it.
So I like Reggie's answer, keeps it open for everyone to do their own thing.
As for that last sentence. It doesn't have to be considered "normal" for someone to ignore it. Could be that they see it as "this is fiction". Or that they don't agree with it, but can ignore it for the rest of the game, there can be many reasons why they don't see it, or don't care to talk about it.
What? What are the political lines in Zelda?
They just had 2 tournaments for games that 1) has females as the default protagonist (Splatoon), and 2) a game where half the cast is female (ARMS).Cant wait to see this response plastered in every thread asking about playable female characters from Nintendo
And that is why I will never really care much for Nintendo games. The don't even dare to have any sort of message other than childish fun.
Sad fact is that Reggie is likely GOP (just because a good 90% of people who make to the C-suite are), while Nintendo's leadership is probably big into the Liberal Democratic party of Japan (also right).
Though their games have done some progressive things over the years, they themselves are likely not.
I don't know if you're being serious, but if you are, that's a terrifying sentiment.
Even if you think you dont have a voice you can take down the evil man.
You could argue BotW has a commentary on the nature of automated drone warfare.
I'd say that's what I'm reading into it though. I wouldn't attribute an overtime political stance from the creators on that though. Certainly not on Nintendo as a body.
Doesn't make it any less meaningful, but I just won't claim Nintendo was intentionally making a statement with it.
That's not a political statement.
And Other M is a commentary on the stress of being a single motherYou could argue BotW has a commentary on the nature of automated drone warfare.
I'd say that's what I'm reading into it though. I wouldn't attribute an overtime political stance from the creators on that though. Certainly not on Nintendo as a body.
Doesn't make it any less meaningful, but I just won't claim Nintendo was intentionally making a statement with it.
Sad fact is that Reggie is likely GOP (just because a good 90% of people who make to the C-suite are), while Nintendo's leadership is probably big into the Liberal Democratic party of Japan (also right).
Though their games have done some progressive things over the years, they themselves are likely not.
Nintendo is the Jimmy Fallon of video games.
Yep.
In the current climate, anyone that is not with you is against you.
oh cool thanks for the demonstration of the other head in sand response in those types of threads "heres my list of 3 things so shut up about it"They just had 2 tournaments for games that 1) has females as the default protagonist (Splatoon), and 2) a game where half the cast is female (ARMS).
There are also 2 Metroid games announced.
soooo...
Cant wait to see this response plastered in every thread asking about playable female characters from Nintendo
You can't be serious
You could argue BotW has a commentary on the nature of automated drone warfare.
Could say Windwaker gave Ganondorf a story in how being marginalized by the world can turn you into the villain.
I'd say that's what I'm reading into it though. I wouldn't attribute an overtime political stance from the creators on that though. Certainly not on Nintendo as a body.
Doesn't make it any less meaningful, but I just won't claim Nintendo was intentionally making a statement with it.
This thread is crazy. I just want to play Kirby.
I'm not saying that they sat around in a room and said "How can we make Mario look more like a man's man". I'm saying that a lot of character designs have changed over the years. This, of course, is part of a art style so it makes sense, but I'm just saying that they weren't trapped here, they could have changed things a little if they wanted.
Man, there are some bad posts in this thread. People not even trying to have a genuine argument.
What point do you think you're making? That it's a lot easier to make your point if you build a disengenuous strawman?
Probably shouldn't be putting people into political boxes without actual evidence to back it up.
It's really messed up.
I was actually just talking more things like Kilton's jokes about destabilizing currency and such. (Though I only thought of that because I saw it last night).
But one could say the setting is in itself political in that way; it doesn't have to be intentional to be so. "Political" here is, of course, fairly meaningless as a term, but every work carries both conscious and unconscious messages from its creafor(s) that reflect their beliefs.
So making the games and marketing them isn't enough? Tell me moreoh cool thanks for the demonstration of the other head in sand response in those types of threads "heres my list of 3 things so shut up about it"
I'm not sure I understand this response.
I 100% believe that video games can and should engage on a cultural and political level whenever they so choose
However, are you suggesting that there is some sort of moral imperative for them to do so? I certainly disagree with that. If Nintendo or anyone else doesn't want to make a political statement, why should you compel them to do so? What's wrong with acknowledging that others can do it, but you won't?
A statement definitely has to be intentional. People can derive all kinds of things from a piece of art that it's creator didn't intend to say something about.Every piece of art is influenced by the views of the people who made it. "Statements" aren't necessarily beating players about the head with an idea and don't even have to be intentional to be made.
Also known as "we are fine with the status quo and won't rock the boat." Nintendo is apparently fine with the way the world is and won't bother to do anything that steps out of its politics.
I guess this answer also helps explain why they have been quiet when it comes to gaming's problems with misogyny and racism and be silent while people in gaming are terrorized by hate campaigns and inherent bigotry.
And in the end it's no wonder they are like this given this response in this thread where people think that it's possible not to be political. Maybe Nintendo's 'apolitical' stance is fine with people who aren't hurt by Nintendos implicit politics in their games (gender, race, sexuality, etc.) and their hardware (class, labor, exploitation).
So it is apparently okay for Nintendo to say they are not political while they still churn out games with white men as the protagonists, with a lack of recognition of LGBTQ, with making people of color invisible, with being quiet about the world beyond games, and so on. Because for them and others unaffected, "it's just games and fun".
Spot on.
Not to be rude, but is this a joke?
Can't find the study that i was thinking of that said people with the title "CEO" were 95% likely to be a Republican, this study says it's 52% likely GOP, but only 2% likely to be Democrat, so we have an idea where the non-reporters (29%) probably lean. http://www.statisticbrain.com/ceo-statistics/
As far as Japan goes, everyone in business is in bed with the LDP, but politics there is less about ideology and more about personal relationships. You're LDP because your associates are, etc.
I'm not being accusatory (big Nintendo fan), just asserting a likely truth.
Kinda sounds like a GG's sentiment; "I don't like politics in my games! I just want to get back to playing games that only characters like me!"
Also known as "we are fine with the status quo and won't rock the boat." Nintendo is apparently fine with the way the world is and won't bother to do anything that steps out of its politics.
I guess this answer also helps explain why they have been quiet when it comes to gaming's problems with misogyny and racism and be silent while people in gaming are terrorized by hate campaigns and inherent bigotry.
And in the end it's no wonder they are like this given this response in this thread where people think that it's possible not to be political. Maybe Nintendo's 'apolitical' stance is fine with people who aren't hurt by Nintendos implicit politics in their games (gender, race, sexuality, etc.) and their hardware (class, labor, exploitation).
So it is apparently okay for Nintendo to say they are not political while they still churn out games with white men as the protagonists, with a lack of recognition of LGBTQ, with making people of color invisible, with being quiet about the world beyond games, and so on. Because for them and others unaffected, "it's just games and fun".